MENU

Fun & Interesting

Better 555 Duty Cycle Control (PWM).

PKAE Electronics 11,843 7 months ago
Video Not Working? Fix It Now

Much better Duty cycle control using the 555 timer in an A-Stable mode of operation. Many of you commented on my previous 555 video asking how to create a circuit that allows a “Duty Cycle” of 50% or less. i.e. making the On time equal to, or less than, the Off time. If you have not seen my previous video, I suggest you take a look at that first by clicking the following link:- https://youtu.be/3lEN6hEGUmE?si=2YMth54Ov4rNPY30 UPDATE:- I have now posted a new video explaining Capacitor Charge and Discharge timings, which can be found here:- https://youtu.be/mllC-hiBepY?si=GKLhJfNhzj1pZE-2 Anyhow, in this follow-up video I show how, by simply adding a couple of diodes you have much greater control over the duty cycle. I also demonstrate how to adapt the circuit to make it a variable duty cycle or controllable PWM (Pulse Width Modulation) circuit. The 555 calculation spreadsheet I put together for this video can be downloaded from here:- 🔗https://1drv.ms/f/c/10f323cd9840b5df/EspKJwBKTStGqnxSNc_afKoB5deboy8ssQj1CPaqEQcMaA?e=IEUkGn If you are interested in the handy configurable Resistor boards I utilised you can purchase them from Amazon here:- 🔗https://amzn.to/3RYiX75 For more information about Potentiometers see one of my previous videos here:- 🔗https://youtu.be/XngaWUy4NP8?si=AE3uQhorrneV4_dj ⏱️Timeline ------------------- 00:00:00 – Introduction 00:00:25 – Recap Previous 555 Video 00:01:28 – Charge & Discharge Timings 00:02:40 – Problem with Standard A-stable circuit. 00:03:10 – 555 Calculator (On/Off/Frequency & Duty Cycle) 00:04:40 – The solution. 00:05:55 – New Calculations 00:06:53 – Breadboard Layout of Circuit 1 00:07:59 – Oscilloscope Output of Circuit 1 00:10:03 – Circuit 1 Summary 00:10:53 – Variable Duty Cycle 1st Option 00:11:15 – Variable Duty Cycle Using Potentiometer 00:11:55 – Breadboard Layout Circuit 2 00:12:39 – Oscilloscope Output of Circuit 2 00:13:32 – Wrap Up Correction: 10:05 the t1 & t2 results should both be 0.01525, not 0.0165 Seconds.

Comment